Anonymous
07/09/2023 15:30
Subject: Re:Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous wrote:Interesting, Smith's statutorily required spending report was due 6-months after his appointment, which means this past April. But he blew past the deadline and released his report a few days ago, more than 2- months late. Why? Because Smith didn't want Republicans in Congress taking any steps to cut his profligate spending in pursuit of Trump, which we now know exceed $5 million! He wanted Trump indicted, with no distractions to the media, and well after he dropped the charges on the former president, then he makes public his spending report. Congress should be furious. But even this demonstrates what a political hack Smith is.
Moreover, there were leaks in the media about certain improper goings-on in the grand jury involved Smith's prosecutors, including questions about attorney-client privilege. The Trump lawyers should file a motion with the court demanding the release of that transcript. The Trump lawyers should file a motion demanding the release of the secret filings and secret order involving Smith's successful effort to deny Trump attorney-client privilege. Trump's lawyer should file a motion demanding dismissal of the case based on the alleged extortion by the prosecutor's office, which stands formally and public accused of reminding counsel for Trump's co-defendant that his application for a judgeship in DC is pending and that he'd benefit form pressuring his client to cooperate with the government against Trump.
Notice that in this diatribe there is no disputing of the charges in the indictment. They can't defend the conduct so it's all bluster and (weak) allegations of misconduct. It's very likely that all the leaks about grand jury activity are from Trump's lawyers to gain favor in the court of public opinion.
Anonymous
07/09/2023 15:24
Subject: Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What is worse - Smith spending $5.5 million in 5 months or Durham spending $6 million in 4 years?
What’s worse is that more than half of off-budget expenses connected to Special Counsel Jack Smith's Trump probe are for security details for Smith provided by the US Marshals. So maybe tell your guy to stop threatening him.
More lies from a fanboy... the following link has a pdf breakdown of the $5 million spent in Q1 and not one item is more than $2.7 million, which are salaries and benefits of lawyers and FBI personal assigned... nice try Karen
https://nypost.com/2023/07/07/doj-has-spent-more-than-9m-investigating-trump-less-than-1-2m-probing-biden-report/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nypost
Anonymous
07/09/2023 14:16
Subject: Re:Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous wrote:Interesting, Smith's statutorily required spending report was due 6-months after his appointment, which means this past April. But he blew past the deadline and released his report a few days ago, more than 2- months late. Why? Because Smith didn't want Republicans in Congress taking any steps to cut his profligate spending in pursuit of Trump, which we now know exceed $5 million! He wanted Trump indicted, with no distractions to the media, and well after he dropped the charges on the former president, then he makes public his spending report. Congress should be furious. But even this demonstrates what a political hack Smith is.
Moreover, there were leaks in the media about certain improper goings-on in the grand jury involved Smith's prosecutors, including questions about attorney-client privilege. The Trump lawyers should file a motion with the court demanding the release of that transcript. The Trump lawyers should file a motion demanding the release of the secret filings and secret order involving Smith's successful effort to deny Trump attorney-client privilege. Trump's lawyer should file a motion demanding dismissal of the case based on the alleged extortion by the prosecutor's office, which stands formally and public accused of reminding counsel for Trump's co-defendant that his application for a judgeship in DC is pending and that he'd benefit form pressuring his client to cooperate with the government against Trump.
There will be no court filings with regard to this because it’s all BS.
Anonymous
07/09/2023 14:10
Subject: Re:Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous wrote:Interesting, Smith's statutorily required spending report was due 6-months after his appointment, which means this past April. But he blew past the deadline and released his report a few days ago, more than 2- months late. Why? Because Smith didn't want Republicans in Congress taking any steps to cut his profligate spending in pursuit of Trump, which we now know exceed $5 million! He wanted Trump indicted, with no distractions to the media, and well after he dropped the charges on the former president, then he makes public his spending report. Congress should be furious. But even this demonstrates what a political hack Smith is.
Moreover, there were leaks in the media about certain improper goings-on in the grand jury involved Smith's prosecutors, including questions about attorney-client privilege. The Trump lawyers should file a motion with the court demanding the release of that transcript. The Trump lawyers should file a motion demanding the release of the secret filings and secret order involving Smith's successful effort to deny Trump attorney-client privilege. Trump's lawyer should file a motion demanding dismissal of the case based on the alleged extortion by the prosecutor's office, which stands formally and public accused of reminding counsel for Trump's co-defendant that his application for a judgeship in DC is pending and that he'd benefit form pressuring his client to cooperate with the government against Trump.
A friendly reminder that Ken Starr's investigation into Bill Clinton cost more than $50 million in $2000 dollars: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/staggering-cost-of-starr-probe/
That's close to $90 million in today's dollars. So please, spare me the sudden concern trolling about the cost of this investigation.
Anonymous
07/09/2023 14:03
Subject: Re:Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous wrote:Interesting, Smith's statutorily required spending report was due 6-months after his appointment, which means this past April. But he blew past the deadline and released his report a few days ago, more than 2- months late. Why? Because Smith didn't want Republicans in Congress taking any steps to cut his profligate spending in pursuit of Trump, which we now know exceed $5 million! He wanted Trump indicted, with no distractions to the media, and well after he dropped the charges on the former president, then he makes public his spending report. Congress should be furious. But even this demonstrates what a political hack Smith is.
Moreover, there were leaks in the media about certain improper goings-on in the grand jury involved Smith's prosecutors, including questions about attorney-client privilege. The Trump lawyers should file a motion with the court demanding the release of that transcript. The Trump lawyers should file a motion demanding the release of the secret filings and secret order involving Smith's successful effort to deny Trump attorney-client privilege. Trump's lawyer should file a motion demanding dismissal of the case based on the alleged extortion by the prosecutor's office, which stands formally and public accused of reminding counsel for Trump's co-defendant that his application for a judgeship in DC is pending and that he'd benefit form pressuring his client to cooperate with the government against Trump.
Just stop already. You are so over the top and lost.
Anonymous
07/09/2023 13:37
Subject: Re:Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Interesting, Smith's statutorily required spending report was due 6-months after his appointment, which means this past April. But he blew past the deadline and released his report a few days ago, more than 2- months late. Why? Because Smith didn't want Republicans in Congress taking any steps to cut his profligate spending in pursuit of Trump, which we now know exceed $5 million! He wanted Trump indicted, with no distractions to the media, and well after he dropped the charges on the former president, then he makes public his spending report. Congress should be furious. But even this demonstrates what a political hack Smith is.
Moreover, there were leaks in the media about certain improper goings-on in the grand jury involved Smith's prosecutors, including questions about attorney-client privilege. The Trump lawyers should file a motion with the court demanding the release of that transcript. The Trump lawyers should file a motion demanding the release of the secret filings and secret order involving Smith's successful effort to deny Trump attorney-client privilege. Trump's lawyer should file a motion demanding dismissal of the case based on the alleged extortion by the prosecutor's office, which stands formally and public accused of reminding counsel for Trump's co-defendant that his application for a judgeship in DC is pending and that he'd benefit form pressuring his client to cooperate with the government against Trump.
Moreover, there were leaks in the media about certain improper goings-on in the grand jury involved Smith's prosecutors, including questions about attorney-client privilege. The Trump lawyers should file a motion with the court demanding the release of that transcript. The Trump lawyers should file a motion demanding the release of the secret filings and secret order involving Smith's successful effort to deny Trump attorney-client privilege. Trump's lawyer should file a motion demanding dismissal of the case based on the alleged extortion by the prosecutor's office, which stands formally and public accused of reminding counsel for Trump's co-defendant that his application for a judgeship in DC is pending and that he'd benefit form pressuring his client to cooperate with the government against Trump.
Anonymous
07/09/2023 11:26
Subject: Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous wrote:What is worse - Smith spending $5.5 million in 5 months or Durham spending $6 million in 4 years?
What’s worse is that more than half of off-budget expenses connected to Special Counsel Jack Smith's Trump probe are for security details for Smith provided by the US Marshals. So maybe tell your guy to stop threatening him.
Anonymous
07/09/2023 08:07
Subject: Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Newly unsealed court documents in Trump indictment reveal that DOJ-laced pictures of Mar-a-Lago boxes did not contain state secrets.
Also, additional information from the indictment revealed Smith and team redacted all the information relating to cooperation by the Trump team on document searches to the Grand Jury.
Summary judgment for Trump is forthcoming
I am not sure whether it is funny or sad for you, but you realize Trump has actually admitted to his crimes he has been indicted with, right?
I don’t think the PP actually keeps up with reality. It’s about “scoring points” and “winning” for him. Reality is irrelevant.
Anonymous
07/09/2023 02:15
Subject: Re:Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Incoming towards Mike Flynn, Sidney Powell, Patrick Byrne
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/06/politics/oval-office-meeting-trump-special-counsel-probe/index.html
Byrne’s tweet makes him sound like a real POS. And I’ve never understood the fifth amendment. If you’re guilty and you know, do the time.
Byrne was the guy who wrote that weird article? I’m not sure what it was exactly, about the meeting with Trump in the White House. I wish I knew where to find it. It was so…. bizarre. These people are so messed up and we have got to beat them back from whence they came. Elon is not an anomaly. These billionaires are a bunch of cranks. They are shockingly stupid. Citizens United will be our undoing.
Anonymous
07/08/2023 22:46
Subject: Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous wrote:What is worse - Smith spending $5.5 million in 5 months or Durham spending $6 million in 4 years?
Durham’s bad faith, fruitless investigation.
Anonymous
07/07/2023 18:56
Subject: Re:Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous wrote:Incoming towards Mike Flynn, Sidney Powell, Patrick Byrne
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/06/politics/oval-office-meeting-trump-special-counsel-probe/index.html
Byrne’s tweet makes him sound like a real POS. And I’ve never understood the fifth amendment. If you’re guilty and you know, do the time.
Anonymous
07/07/2023 17:15
Subject: Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Deranged Jack Smiths got him this time 😂
Anonymous
07/07/2023 17:04
Subject: Re:Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Incoming towards Mike Flynn, Sidney Powell, Patrick Byrne
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/06/politics/oval-office-meeting-trump-special-counsel-probe/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/06/politics/oval-office-meeting-trump-special-counsel-probe/index.html
Anonymous
07/06/2023 12:13
Subject: Re:Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries
Anonymous